Studies in Indian Philosophy

SR No.: 001580
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1981
Total Pages: 352
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, Epistemology, & Religion
File Size: 21 MB

Page 253

226
Studies in Indian Philosophy is nothing but anumiti or anumāna of the logicians. The followers of Anandavardhana like Mammaţa, Ruyyaka* (and Jayaratha, his commentator), Hemacandra5 and Viśvanātha briefly refer to Mahimabha ta’s criticism and answer it saying that the anumāna in poetry does not satisfy the conditions or requirements of a valid inference that are laid down by the science of Logic and therefore it cannot displace dhvani.
So far I have come across two papers on Logic and its influence on Alamkāra-Šāstra, one by Professor Sivaprasad Bhattacharyya' and the other by Professor Anantalal Thakur. 8 The approach, aim and treatment adopted in this paper is however, markedly, nay, wholly different.
Although the ancient thinkers like Bharata, Bhāmaha, Dandin, Vāmana, Rudrața nowhere speak of the vyañjanāvịtti or the dhvani, they were certainly aware of the existence of the pratiyamāna artha (additional sense over and above the denoted sense (mukhyārtha, vācyārtha or sariketitārtha) as well as the connotated sense (lak syārtha) in poetry. It was Anandavardhana (or the Dhvanikara) who for the first time postulated the new vyañjanā vrtti and the novel theory of dhvani in his epoch-making work, the Dhvanyāloka. His great commentator, Abhinavagupta, the Locanakāra, and celebrated followers like Mammața, the Vāgdevatāvatāra or Vyutpannasiromani, of Kāvyaprakāśa fame gave their powerful and solid support to Anandavardhana's vyañjanā-vștti and the theory of dhvani demolishing and defeating strong opposition and fierce attacks from the worihy opponents like Bhațța Nāyaka, Mahimabhatta, Dhanajaya and Dhanika. In this paper we do not propose to go into the merits and defects of the arguments advanced by the two sides in refuting the rival's point of view and establishing one's own. We are mainly interested in kpowing what place, according to the Sanskrit thinkers, Logic has in poetry or in other words what role it is expected, according to them, to play in poetry.
Now the Sanskrit thinkers, one and all, proudly declare that the poetic universe excels the real universe and that it